Dogen, I am not privy to who you or Ember778 are. Therefor, I can't really temper you words with that. Additionally, Ember778 has already stated he was being hyperbole (though, I understand how you could have missed it).

However, I will say Ember778's apparent history of judeophobia and general online mannerism is causing me to regret having this conversation. He still seems more of failed shock jock than a dangerous fanatic, however. But, as I said, I have no real way of knowing._________________A MtG Webcomic

Sure, he said he meant it hyperbolically. However, a lot of people say things they don't mean to appear more socially desirable. Again, I temper my interpretation of his posts through the lens of his accumulated body of work. Similarly, while you're not privy to who I am in any significant way, you're privy to my extensive body of work here on the forum. Using it to inform your interpretation of what people mean is pretty normal (for instance, it's how we decide for whom to vote in elections*). It may not be complete, but it's the best tool you have.

I also never said he was a fanatic, and did say, "I don't know how deeply he dislikes feminists."

* EDIT: Obviously, I mean that we use a limited and continuously-evolving (one hopes) sampling of data to make judgements about the nature of people, not that we decide how to vote based on how politicians post on forums - though you could sort of do that, too_________________"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman

Perhaps I too was being hyperbolic in my use of the term "dangerous fanatic." The point I was trying to make was that he seems more hapless than malicious. Looking at his greater body of work, I truly believe he says most of what he says for shock value. He is trying to be (funny)/(tough) but has severely misjudged his audience. That he dislikes feminists is not in question, but I don't see any convincing evidence that he assigns the level of deliberate animosity you seem to be implying.

But, it seems you've read more of his posts than I, so maybe I simply missed the extent of his malevolence.

Dogen wrote:

Sure, he said he meant it hyperbolically. However, a lot of people say things they don't mean to appear more socially desirable.

Unfortunately, this logic bites both ways. Certainly, you were more deliberate in your statements than he, and clearly spent more time and thought on them. I feel it's very possible you dislike mislabers about the same as Ember778 dislikes feminists; you just likely avoided using the term "hatred" in an attempt to 'save face' while he likely used it for its shock effect.
This assessment is meant to incorporate the greater context, of course._________________A MtG Webcomic

Sure, he said he meant it hyperbolically. However, a lot of people say things they don't mean to appear more socially desirable. Again, I temper my interpretation of his posts through the lens of his accumulated body of work. Similarly, while you're not privy to who I am in any significant way, you're privy to my extensive body of work here on the forum. Using it to inform your interpretation of what people mean is pretty normal (for instance, it's how we decide for whom to vote in elections*). It may not be complete, but it's the best tool you have.

I also never said he was a fanatic, and did say, "I don't know how deeply he dislikes feminists."

* EDIT: Obviously, I mean that we use a limited and continuously-evolving (one hopes) sampling of data to make judgements about the nature of people, not that we decide how to vote based on how politicians post on forums - though you could sort of do that, too

I meant that someone changed my previous quote into something I did not say.

Upon further investigation it seems it was the same person I responded to so it really doesn't matter.

Perhaps I too was being hyperbolic in my use of the term "dangerous fanatic." The point I was trying to make was that he seems more hapless than malicious. Looking at his greater body of work, I truly believe he says most of what he says for shock value. He is trying to be (funny)/(tough) but has severely misjudged his audience. That he dislikes feminists is not in question, but I don't see any convincing evidence that he assigns the level of deliberate animosity you seem to be implying.

But, it seems you've read more of his posts than I, so maybe I simply missed the extent of his malevolence.

Dogen wrote:

Sure, he said he meant it hyperbolically. However, a lot of people say things they don't mean to appear more socially desirable.

Unfortunately, this logic bites both ways. Certainly, you were more deliberate in your statements than he, and clearly spent more time and thought on them. I feel it's very possible you dislike mislabers about the same as Ember778 dislikes feminists; you just likely avoided using the term "hatred" in an attempt to 'save face' while he likely used it for its shock effect.
This assessment is meant to incorporate the greater context, of course.

I feel like this is how artists and writers feel when people try and interpret their work.

You guys are going way too deep into this. It's not that hard to see. I'm not trying to shock anyone, or get people to laugh. I merely expressed my opinion with words that apparently you guys take very seriously.

Hate to me isn't a very strong word. I tell my friends I hate them, but I have no desire for for harm upon them in any way. While I dislike feminism I don't want them hurt or anything.

Like if your friend kills you in a video game or something I'd be all like man I fucking hate you. And I call this one friend of mine a faggot every time he invites me to a game and we're on skype chat.

Sure, he said he meant it hyperbolically. However, a lot of people say things they don't mean to appear more socially desirable.

Unfortunately, this logic bites both ways. Certainly, you were more deliberate in your statements than he, and clearly spent more time and thought on them. I feel it's very possible you dislike mislabers about the same as Ember778 dislikes feminists; you just likely avoided using the term "hatred" in an attempt to 'save face' while he likely used it for its shock effect.
This assessment is meant to incorporate the greater context, of course.

I've been accused in the past of being too nice. I consider that claim, like yours, to be sampling error. Naturally, I'm biased in this regard, but anyone who can look through my thousands of posts and see either extreme, it seems, is simply finding what they want to see. The main problem, though is this: There was nothing socially undesirable about my post. I could make weekly posts about wanting to eviscerate every last one of you and still be as moderately well-liked as I am now (maybe more so, if they were funny; see Monkey). We don't typically punish what I would call "semi-benign antisocial behavior." Semi-benign because the feelings are real and usually the intent is on point - the subject of wrath has usually done something the poster perceives as antagonizing, and the post is a direct response to that - but it's otherwise mostly harmless. And most of the time no ill will is suffered from the community (in fact sometimes it's afforded a measure of respect). So in that respect there's nothing undesirable about my post. In fact, since it was directed toward the comic subforum, and is mostly out of character (again, see my body of work) some people probably really enjoyed it. So if there's any moderation going on it's not as a result of feeling my views are out of line with those of the group, quite the contrary. The group likes that shit, when it's done right. The moderation comes from my own internal sense of ethics. I'm not a violent or aggressive person. Sometimes those words are just useful for expressing frustration (... and drunkenness, as I asure you I was).

In contrast, "the community" has received Ember negatively, based on his comments. Any attempt to walk back what he says is thus more in line with the classical social desirability bias. It's all about knowing your audience (or, in this case, not knowing them and suffering as a result)._________________"Worse comes to worst, my people come first, but my tribe lives on every country on earth. Iíll do anything to protect them from hurt, the human race is what I serve." - Baba Brinkman

and since it's a written strip, we really can't tell if slick's voice is guttural, or nasal, or a rather pleasing light tenor, let alone whether or not it has changed.

And you know exactly what I meant when I said guttural, you're just trolling.

It just so happens I don't know what you meant by "guttural" and officially put in a request to be informed what the fuck you're talking about.

i second this. i mean, i even gave you a link to what the word 'guttural' means. i can only interpret what you write by what the words you write mean, and the word you used means "of the throat" "harsh, throaty", and i have never seen it used in any other way than to characterize the way something sounds. if you mean something else by that word, you need to give us your definition.

or use the correct word, whatever that might be._________________aka: neverscared!
a flux of vibrant matter

Dogen: Certainly, that you feel the word "hatred" carries strong meaning is, in fact, the very point of this discussion. So, of course you omitted it from your post do to your own inner compass (I was clearly misguided in guessing otherwise).

The post of yours in question was in-line with the culture of the forum, but that is neither here or there. If anything, it would help my point. So, I don't know why you spent the majority of your (well written) post outlining that fact.
Your other point: That you--yourself--are already in-line with the culture of the forum, and thus it was not the presences of the audience that caused you to say what you did and--as such--mere happenstance that people liked it. That point is more relevant, but still not convincing. This is the internet, everything we type is--at least in some part--for the benefit of those reading. However, that your internal sense of right and wrong caused you to omit the word "hate," and that your internal sense of right and wrong is very much in-synch with the forum's is something I not only believe and agree with, but would say is self evident. I might even go so far as to postulate your sense of right and wrong had more of an influence than the other way around, but that is ideal speculation for another time.

The issue I've been trying to get at is not whether your self-identify as a "hater"(you clearly don't), or whether or not your actions are acceptable for the majority of the forum(they clearly are). It was why you were in such disbelieve of Ember778's ease in using the word, and why you felt that when he used it he was intending to convey a stronger form of animosity than you meant in your post.

Anyway,
I will say at this point I do have the deeper understanding of the situation I was seeking. Thank you for your time, Dogen. I look forward to future interactions.

Ember778 wrote:

Lich Mong wrote:

Ember778, I don't see how anything you're saying contradicts anything I'm saying. If you think it does then either you misunderstand what I mean by "shock value" or you just have low self-awareness.

Perhaps both.

I'm sorry we must have very different definitions of shock value. See I didn't and don't use the word hate to induce a shock. I used it because it's just a common word I use.

If your claim is that you use it for "no reason whatsoever, just cuz" then I'm going to go with choice 2 and leave it at that. Sufficient to say, the evidence is--at least--mounting in that direction._________________A MtG Webcomic

Perhaps I too was being hyperbolic in my use of the term "dangerous fanatic." The point I was trying to make was that he seems more hapless than malicious. Looking at his greater body of work, I truly believe he says most of what he says for shock value. He is trying to be (funny)/(tough) but has severely misjudged his audience. That he dislikes feminists is not in question, but I don't see any convincing evidence that he assigns the level of deliberate animosity you seem to be implying.

But, it seems you've read more of his posts than I, so maybe I simply missed the extent of his malevolence.

Dogen wrote:

Sure, he said he meant it hyperbolically. However, a lot of people say things they don't mean to appear more socially desirable.

Unfortunately, this logic bites both ways. Certainly, you were more deliberate in your statements than he, and clearly spent more time and thought on them. I feel it's very possible you dislike mislabers about the same as Ember778 dislikes feminists; you just likely avoided using the term "hatred" in an attempt to 'save face' while he likely used it for its shock effect.
This assessment is meant to incorporate the greater context, of course.

I feel like this is how artists and writers feel when people try and interpret their work.

You guys are going way too deep into this. It's not that hard to see. I'm not trying to shock anyone, or get people to laugh. I merely expressed my opinion with words that apparently you guys take very seriously.

Hate to me isn't a very strong word. I tell my friends I hate them, but I have no desire for for harm upon them in any way. While I dislike feminism I don't want them hurt or anything.

Like if your friend kills you in a video game or something I'd be all like man I fucking hate you. And I call this one friend of mine a faggot every time he invites me to a game and we're on skype chat.

Okay, so quick summary here:
Lich Mong (I really do like you, but come on) tried to equate somebody who said this:

Ember778 wrote:

Man you call out the Jews once and you never forget it.

with Dogen (who apparently is a bleeding heart for not going around saying "hurr hurr, you're a douchebag for disagreeing with me, look how I can click the edit button and act like a somehow even less talented perez hilton") because Dogen wants to (most likely kayfabe) punch people who don't post the date on the comic strips.

And this went on for 9 pages.

You know how rulebooks for any game usually have an example of play? Like "in this turn, team rarity moves their forces in europe, notice how combat works"? This page is the new guide for new people coming to the forum._________________Marriage begins with a man on his knees giving a woman jewelry and asking for permission to do something. Pretty much sets the tone for the next 40 years.